Why I disagree with Libertarianism

Communism was achieved. It just didn't deliver the results that Marx promised us.

 

So by being something completely different than what it was intended, it was achieved
Okie doke if you say so

 

Gary Johnson for president..

 

lol

 

Sigh... You realize it appears you give up trying to be serious if you reply like that.
Maybe you do and you're ok with that, but it often seems you pose such a silly refutal as a brilliant witty reaction.
Most ignore such a vid post, you're glad you had the last word and the whole goddamn thing will repeat some time later.
A convenient side effect for you is people losing their patience and the sheer will to take you seriously (no one can blame people on here for that), which you then can and will set away as an inability to correct your antisocialist nonsense or as intolerant libtard behavior.
I think you have the idea plenty of people here still fall for that, but that seems arguable. You mainly get back up and support from other people who are here to trigger and annoy 'the left' on social media.

If this was a private forum only the regulars would see, you would probably get ignored a lot more. The only reason people keep correcting you on the same fucking issue is that its a public social media platform.

 

For the most part, I've given up on the historical ignorance of this forum. The same Marx-inspired command economy models have been implemented time and time again, and the result is always the same.

So I felt rather than having to type it out for y'all all over again, I found a cartoon that maybe people with a short attention span, or poor reading comprehension could understand.

I mourn for all the poor trees that were brutally murdered for the mere purpose of printing the books and pages of collectivist/leftist literature that rotted out the minds of present-day generations.

 

But where is Aleppo?

 

Pot callin' the kettle... Your pretensions to a command of history are laughable. Did you get through History 101?

 

I'm just going to say it
You are way too illogical and irrational to be this arrogant
And I dont know what point you think you're making.
All I said was that Marxism, along with libertarianism, are both ideals that cannot work in reality.
You then post some video that I didnt watch but I'm assuming shows the failures of communism
So you're agreeing with me, communism doesnt work. As far as government systems go, it's a real shit one.

And see, that's your problem. You cant win an argument with honesty so you have to pretend I'm (or anyone with whom you want to argue) saying something I'm not actually saying, so you can then attack the strawman and feel like you've won something.

 

Apollo is a borough in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania, United States, 35 miles northeast of Pittsburgh in a former coal-mining region. Apollo was settled in 1790, laid out in 1816, and incorporated as a borough in 1848.

 

Ah, modern Libertarianism, nostalgia for the Lex Mercatoria system of 1,000 years ago.

You know, nostalgia's not what it used to be. During the "high point" of Libertarianism, about 1/3 of all people died before the age of 5, and 1/5 of girls and women who lived to a reproductive age died in childbirth or from complications therefrom.

I actually like having meat sold as food subject to inspection, and expecting that medicine I take isn't rat poison. Funny me.

 

My understanding is that Plains Indian tribes were, to all intents and purposes, anarchists. Tribal chiefs ruled by personal authority and what we might call social engineering. However, they could not compel anyone to do anything except, oddly enough, during a major hunt where they could say, "Your job is to do this". No objection was allowed. Even warfare- it was probably unheard of for a man to refuse to fight for the tribe, but there was no actual rule on the matter.

 

A totally unconsidered response. The fact that 1/3 of children died by the age of five (if that is true, and I would not doubt it) was unlikely a result of the "libertarian" nature of society so much as the technology and social structure of the day. You are completely miscasting the situation.

 

Why’s it the government’s job to inspect food when it can be done through a network of numerous private organizations who can provide info and quality reviews? We live in an era where the LCD phone in your pocket can quickly look up that information before you purchase anything.

By the way, if you take blood thinning medicine to avoid blood clots. That’s the same chemicals in rat poison. Called Warfarin.

 

As a socialist, what parts of communism/Marxism do you disagree with?

 

Definitely the part where you are sent to gulag for being a disingenuous clown

 

It has to be remembered that communist thought grew out of anarchist thinking and was meant to lead to Anarchy in the ‘withering of the state’.

"Withering away of the state" is a Marxist concept coined by Friedrich Engels referring to the idea that with realization of the ideals of socialism the social institution of a state will eventually become obsolete and disappear as the society will be able to govern itself without the state

Anarchy is communal and cooperative.

But at the other end of the spectrum is Anarcho-capitalism (also known as “libertarian anarchy” or “market anarchism” or “free market anarchism”) is a libertarian and individualist anarchist political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty in a free market

This anarchy is definitely NOT communal and cooperative it is based on social Darwinist ideas of competition and the survival of the fittest where the week and disadvantaged are exploited and allowed to die when used up.

Anarcho-capitalists are against the State simply because they are capitalists first and foremost. Their critique of the State ultimately rests on a liberal interpretation of liberty as the inviolable rights to and of private property. They are not concerned with the social consequences of capitalism for the weak, powerless and ignorant. Their claim that all would benefit from a free exchange in the market is by no means certain; any unfettered market system would most likely sponsor a reversion to an unequal society with defence associations perpetuating exploitation and privilege. If anything, anarcho-capitalism is merely a free-for-all in which only the rich and cunning would benefit. It is tailor-made for 'rugged individualists' who do not care about the damage to others or to the environment which they leave in their wake. The forces of the market cannot provide genuine conditions for freedom any more than the powers of the State. The victims of both are equally enslaved, alienated and oppressed.

As such, anarcho-capitalism overlooks the egalitarian implications of traditional individualist anarchists like Spooner and Tucker. In fact, few anarchists would accept 'anarcho-capitalists' into the anarchist camp since they do not share a concern for economic equality and social justice. Their self-interested, calculating market men would be incapable of practising voluntary co-operation and mutual aid. Anarcho-capitalists, even if they do reject the State, might therefore best be called right-wing libertarians rather than anarchists.

 

The thing is that while most left wingers have moved on and learnt from the mistakes of the past many on the right and especially the libertarian right do not seem to have moved on from the 19th century ideas of Social Darwinism and laissez-faire economics or even notice how deeply flawed and even dangerous those idea have and can be.

 

Isn't there a golden middle road here? There's an obvious concern with relying on private organizations for food inspection. So if too many people would have a similar concern about it being a government responsibility (doesn't seem the case) some kind of public nonprofit organisation seems better.